click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130202
20130210
STATION
CSPAN 11
MSNBCW 9
MSNBC 8
WTTG 1
LANGUAGE
English 44
Search Results 0 to 43 of about 44 (some duplicates have been removed)
a long time, when the c.i.a. for 25 years, now he's been with the obama administration as a national security advisor for four years. and while he was not the architect of the drone program itself, he has been the architect of the obama administration drone program. and i came away from there with the feeling that i had going in that there is a definite direction of not capturing these high value targets and soliciting information from them through detention and interrogation. >> but because he said that it's ideal or preferrable to capture them so you can get intelligence. >> yet when i asked him how many high value targets they had captured in the last four years on the obama administration, he dodged and weaved there. >> he said he would get back to you with a number. >> the fact is, i know what the number is. it's one. he allude to do it a little later in his testimony. we captured a guy, we put him on a ship for 60 days and sailed around in the ocean, interrogated him. you know, that's not a detention interrogation policy that can be -- >> brennan also, as mike emmanuel pointed
: another pending addition to the obama administration is senator chuck hagel, who was been nominated to be the secretary of defense. if he becomes the secretary of defense, what is his involvement in the sequestration process going to be? guest: he will be in general in making these cuts happen. he is a veteran and a former member of the senate armed services committee. he knows the military. one of the reasons he was brought into this is because he knows how to cut. he knows what works and what does not. at least that is what the administration thinks. he will be an effective person, and leaves the white house hopes, in making these cuts take place. host: we are talking with ray locker, the national security editor at the newspaper, usa today. our next call comes from st. louis on our line for republicans. go ahead, greg. caller: even though the sequestered takes place, instead of spending 40 cents of every dollar, we would only be spending 38 cents out of every dollar. i did not know if it makes a difference. i think we need sequestration. thanks. guest: one of the things that many
yet the obama administration within months of taking office released several olc memos describing the legal justification for the treatment of terrorist detainees in u.s. custody. within months of taking office released several olc memos describing the legal justification for the treatment of terrorist detainees in u.s. custody. do you think it was appropriate that a different standard was applied to the release of the memos from the bush administration than those produced by the obama administration? >> i do not think there was a different standard. >> one was released within four months of the obama administration taking office. the other had been requested for a much longer time. >> i am not a lawyer. i have come to learn of the term sui generis. the olc memos released after the president came into office were released because the program was terminated. olc will counsel opinions, and those opinions were looked at in a different way because of the sui generis circumstances. >> both are essential for the ability of congress to carry its oversight responsibilities. finally, the i
threat. the obama administration has focused almost entirely on al qaeda. believing people when they came in and said, look, the only people who can actually give you advice on dealing with these radical folks are islamic believers, he so you must get advice from us. form partnerships with us, let us give you advice, let us tell you how to deal with this threat. and they made great inroads in this administration in that approach. but the blindness of the larger jihadist threat, the enterprise that is being pursued by the muslim brotherhood abroad, has resulted in the practice of drone delivered assassinations of al qaeda figures with what many are questioning or arguing is due process without that. and this administration's repeated declaration that al qaeda is being defeated. they know not of what they speak. the idea that al qaeda is being defeated is helping recruit others who are radical jihadists, because they are able to point to a united states administration that is so blind and so uninformed of what really is going on that they think al qaeda's on the decline when radical jihad i
: first term scandals could be coming back to haunt the obama administration as a columnist suggests some high profile leaks could amount to an inpeachable offense. that high. we'll look at legal arguments from both sides. 24 hours after the obama administration had given authorities to kill americans with drones, we're asking why there's not more outrage in the media and capitol hill. hollywood speaks out defending the second amendment. here is a hint who it is. [ male announcer ] truth is, dayquil doesn't treat that. really? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your runny nose. [ breathes deeply ] awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is. that's the cold truth! i have obligations. cute tobligations, but obligations.g. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment object
department of justice memo obtained by nbc news. the memo outlines the obama administration's justification for the targeted killing of american citizens overseas by drone strikes if those citizens are considered to be high-level al qaeda operatives plotting against the united states. progressives want answers. tonight an administration official tells nbc news that president obama has directed the justice department to provide congressional intelligence committees access to classified information providing the legal rationale for these drone strikes. this comes after the white house faced a second day of questioning on the subject. spokesman jay carney says president obama is not troubled by the memo being made public. >> he thinks that it is legitimate to ask questions about how we prosecute the war against al qaeda. >> senator ron wyden, a member of the senate intelligence committee, has been a critic of the drone program for years. every american has the right to know when their government believes it is allowed to kill them. he tells nbc news, "the memo doesn't answer the central questi
that in the first two years of president obama's administration there were four times the number of targeted killings than in eight years of president bush's administration. is your testimony today that the huge increase in the number of lethal strikes has no connection to the change in the obama administration's detention policy? because obviously for capturing a terrorist, we have the opportunity to interrogate that individual and perhaps learn of ongoing plots. but if the strike is done, that opportunity is lost. are you saying today that it is totally unconnected to the obama administration's shift in
. that's because, as "the new york times" reported just a few weeks ago, the obama administration has simply on its own redefined civilian to mean any male of military age who was found in a strike zone meaning anyone that we kill who is a male of the age between 16 and 54 we automatically count as a militant or a terrorist without knowing anything about what they've been doing, who they really are. what independent researchers have found by going into pakistan and to yemen and somalia is that there are hundreds and hundreds of innocent women men and children who have been killed by u.s. drones. so dianne feinstein and the obama administration can stand up all they want and say that civilian deaths are in the single digits. the rest of the world and independent facts prove that's a falsehood. >> john: brennan told senator wyden, democrat of oregon, there was a misimpression out there that drone strikes are used to punish terrorists. i don't know who had that impression but brennan insisted the c.i.a. sends in the drones only as a last resort to save lives when no other alternative is
the other obama administration has been, officials have been. i expect by now he'll admit it was a terrorist attack which would be a welcome change. look, i think he's hoping to be asked about drones because he doesn't want to be asked uncomfortable questions about other issues. and my fear is that the drones, is going to divert attention away from benghazi that need to be explored and divert attention away from issues like quite frankly. john brennan was the height of the bush administration the enhanced interrogation program. so he was literally the principal consumer of intelligence for khalid shaikh mohammed and others. if he claims he was opposed to it why didn't he speak out and quite frankly why aren't we interrogating people. when you vaporize a terrorist with a drone you vaporize their intelligence in their brain. we're killing everybody on drones and happening on his watch and ought to be answering questions about that. >> alisyn: and simon, you know how washington works, and things are not always as they seem at first blush. is it as we hear marc sort of saying, leaked to the new
. ♪ >>> coming up, liberals have serious questions about the obama administration's legal justification for targeting killing of americans. the white house has responded tonight. our big panel tackles the issue, and we'll have the latest. >>> karl rove is running cover for mitch mcconnell by going after ashley judd in a new commercial? tonight we have ashley judd's response to turd blossom. >>> and a brand-new to tack on to hillary clinton from our friends across the street. it will make your jaw drop, friend. you can listen to my radio on sirius xm radio monday through friday from noon to 3:00 p.m. slayer your thoughts on facebook and on twitter. we are coming right back. and only at officemax stores! ♪ ♪ i want candy ♪ ♪ i want candy ♪ but that doesn't mean i don't want to make money.stor. i love making money. i try to be smart with my investments. i also try to keep my costs down. what's your plan? ishares. low cost and tax efficient. find out why nine out of ten large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prosp
, liberals have serious questions about the obama administration's legal justification for targeting killing of americans. the white house has responded tonight. our big panel tackles the issue, and we'll have the latest. >>> karl rove is running cover for mitch mcconnell by going after ashley judd in a new commercial? tonight we have ashley judd's response to turd blossom. >>> and a brand-new attack on to hillary clinton from our friends across the street. it will make your jaw drop, friend. you can listen to my radio on sirius xm radio monday through friday from noon to 3:00 p.m. share your thoughts on facebook and on twitter. we are coming right back. all your important legal matters in just minutes. protect your family... and launch your dreams. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. to compete on the global stage. what we need are people prepared for the careers of our new economy. by 2025 we could have 20 million jobs without enough college graduates to fill them. that's why at devry university, we're teaming up with companies like cisco to help make sure everyone is ready with
. >> please remove that woman. >> and the obama administration refuse to tell congress! they won't even tell congress what country we are killing children in. >> please. >> senator feinstein -- >> if you could expedite the removal. >> the children of pakistan and yemen. are they more important? do your job! world peace depends on it! we're making more enemies. >> please proceed. mr. brennan, the next time we're going to clear the chamber. and bring people back in one by one. this witness is entitled to be heard, ladies and gentlemen. so please give him that opportunity. >> thank you. a heart felt thank you also goes to my family in new jersey, my mother and father who emigrated from ireland nearly 65 years ago. >> pakistan and, mr. brennan, if you don't know who they are i have the list. i have the list of all the names and the ages. >> all right. i'm going to -- we're going to halt the hearing. i'm going to ask that the room be cleared and that the code pink associates not be permitted to come back in. i've done this five times now and five times are enough. so we'll recess. for a few minut
that in if first two years of president obama's administration there were four times the number of targeted killings than in eight years of president bush's administration. your testimony today that the huge increase in number of lethal strikes has no connection to the change in the obama administration's detention policy? because, obviously, for capturing a terrorist we have the opportunity to interrogate that individual and perhaps learn about ongoing plots. if the strike is done that opportunity is lost. are you saying today, it is totally unconnected to the obama administration's shift in its detainee policy? >> i can say that there is not an occasion that we had the opportunity to capture a terrorist and we didn't and we decided to do a strike. there is no correlation in any type of the c.i.a.'s interrogation program. if you look at the last four years what happened in a number of places, such as yemen eastern areas, there was a growth of al qaeda, quite unfortunately. what we tried to do in this administration is to take every measure to protect the lives of american citizens whether
administration more generally -- obama administration more generally. for the past four years the executive branch has gone to extraordinary lengths to obscure the danger posed by those who practice holy war or jihad against our country. the administration has also sought to silence and in some cases punish those who have spoken the trute about this menace. -- the truth about this menace. mr. speaker, i welcome the secretary's warning, belater though it may be. however, it would have served this country and the cause of freedom far more if she would have so openly and to have led encountering it at any point during her tenure other than its conclusion. one of the most important architects of that see no jihad policy over the past four years has been john brennan, president obama's homeland security advisor and his pick to become the next director of the central intelligence agency. in may, 2010, mr. brennan publicly declared that we do not describe our enemy as jihadists or islamists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenant of islam, meaning to purify one's self or one's commun
is an example of a regulation that the obama administration has promised a did that is a ridiculous drag on growth? >> think about cycle times of the fda. think about the fact that it takes 12 years to get a power line permitted across state lines. i could give you -- read the reports. we spelled out a number of them. every permit should be approved in less than 24 months. there are jobs there. i guarantee it. there is no excuse for anybody not to have a short cycle time. >> you say that to obama. what does he say? >> he stepped in on the jobs council and said we will shorten this one. there are 28 permits that the president stepped in and said, bank, here we go. -- bang, here we go. one may say the entire epa needs to be reformed. he says, i am not quite there yet. in some specific -- a lot of action. and others -- there is a lot more to do. i would not listen to jeffrey immelt. i would benchmark us compared to others moving ahead. when i am in africa selling locomotives, i am not competing against any u.s. company. i am competing against global players. regulation is a good thing to wo
on the panel are received classified information about how the obama administration is justifying drone strikes own american terrorists overseas. brennan helped manage the drone program. he is likely going to be challenged on it today. lawmakers also expected to ask him about waterboarding and for what he knew about some high-profile national security leaks. a lot of big topics. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel is live from capitol hill with more. within those hallways, mike, what are you hearing about? what will really be the focus of this hearing? >> reporter: jenna, i think you hit on a lot of the key topics. senator i don't know mccain is among those very interested in brennan's position on those enhanced interrogation techniques during the bush administration. brennan came out and said he was opposed to waterboarding. mccain wants to know if there is any evidence that brennan was opposed to waterboarding. brennan said he favored some aspects of the enhanced interrogation program. as for the drones we expect he will take some heat from the left. also some heat in terms of kill
the president. the mainstream media is giving the obama administration a pass and that needs to stop. martha: we'll hear from the cia, the man who is expected to be the head of the cia, downbrennan, there is so much focus on the drone issue. i want to get your thoughts on that. i know you are supportive of that program overall. do you think that because of the drone issue that john brennan will get a pass on what he knew because we haven't heard from him on that. >> isn't that a good question in the counter terrorism director of the united states has not said one word about the actions he took when he was notified. there is a joint task force by law that is supposed to meet when there is a terrorist attack. they weren't even called into session. i'll ask panetta why that is so. no one has asked john brennan anything about benghazi. he's in the chain of command to do something about it. it's dumbfounding the lack of scrutiny this administration has had regarding benghazi. martha: we know hillary clinton was basically up all night trying to get help in the area from the libyan government. we don't
part of this morning reading them. yet the obama administration within months of taking office released several olc memos describing the legal justification for the treatment of terrorist detainees in u.s. custody. do you think it was appropriate that a different standard was applied to the release of the memos from the bush administration than those produced by the obama administration? >> i do not think there was a different standard. >> one was released within four months of the obama administration taking office. the other had been requested for a very long -- a much longer time. >> i am not a lawyer. i have come to learn of the term dui generis. the olc memos released after the president came into office were released because the program was terminated. olc wiolll counsel opinions, and those opinions were looked at in a different way because of the sui generis circumstances. >> both are essential for the ability of congress to carry its oversight responsibilities. finally, the intelligence reform act and terrorist prevention act of 2004, with which you are very familiar and which i
years of president obama's administration there were four times the number of targeted killings than in eight years of president bush's administration. your testimony today that the huge increase in number of lethal strikes has no connection to the change in the obama administration's detention policy? because, obviously, for capturing a terrorist we have the opportunity to interinvestigate that individual and perhaps learn about ongoing plots. if the strike is done that opportunity is lost. are you saying today, it is totally unconnected to the obama administration's shift in its detainee policy? >> i can say that there is not an occasion that we had the opportunity to capture a terrorist and we didn't and we decided to do a strike. there is no correlation in any type of the c.i.a.'s interrogation program. if you look at the last four years what happened in a number of places, such as yemen eastern areas, there was a growth of al qaeda, quite unfortunately. what we tried to do in this administration is to take every measure to protect the lives of american citizens whether it is abr
? joining us now is oregon democratic senator ron wyden, who has repeatedly asked the obama administration bower drone policy. senator wyden, it's good to see you. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me again. >> did you not in fact get what you had asked the president to give you and that you thought you would be getting this morning based on your conversation with the president last night? >> rachel, it's not clear. the fact is, and i went in first thing this morning, i was able to read some information that was helpful. i'm just not convinced yet that it is the full legal analysis that we need to do to do vigorous oversight. what today was really about is of course it was a nomination hearing for john brennan. but it ultimately was a question of upholding our system of checks and balances in government. and i think that system is out of whack these days and we've got to do some more for transparency and accountability in getting those checks and balances back. >> in terms of this specific program that you've been asking about the legal advice for, specifically targeting
of the cia. john brennan, the architect of the obama administration's drone program, strongly defended their use, saying strikes only take place to prevent terror threats, not as punishment for them. >> i think there is a misimpression on the part of some american people who believe that we take strikes to punish terrorists for past transgressions. nothing could be further from the truth. we only take such actions as a last resort to save lives when there's no other alternative to taking an action that's going to mitigate that threat. >> democratic senator ron wyden who has demanded more insight into the administration's legal justification for drone strikes against americans pressed brennan on the issue. >> do you believe that the president should provide an individual american with the opportunity to surrender before killing them? >> any american who joins al qaeda will know full well that they have joined an organization that is at war with the united states and has killed thousands upon thousands of individuals, many, many of them who were americans. so i think any american who did
wrote to president obama asking for the underlining memos that the administration still has approdeclined to provide to congress. 11 senators signed that. a total of eight democrats and three republicans. democrat ron wyden was leading the charge on a letter. the chairman of the senate judiciary committee patrick leahy was on the letter on the democratic side. on the republican side, a motley crew of senators. you had mike lee of utah, grassley of iowa, susan collins of maine. that sort of indication of where you get concerned about the drone issue on the hill. you see a smattering of liberal democrats concerned in the house and a small handful of libertarian-leaning republicans that have expressed concerns on this issue. host: these underlying memos that the members of congress want, do they have to do with just drone strikes in general, drone strikes that have occurred against other alleged al qaeda operatives? guest: they may not happen to withdraw on strikes in general. they might have to do with drone strikes in specific. one of the issues that came up here is our anwar
democrats continue their meeting since in virginia today. president obama adjust them. in administration and the news, secretary of state john carey has his first bilateral meeting with his canadian, board -- john kerry had his first bilateral meeting. and secretary panetta testified before congress on the benghazi attacked and also facing scrutiny was nominee for cia director. one of the things he talked about is how much of the public and congress should know about the u.s. drove stride program. we would like to hear your opinion. what is the balance between government secrecy and the public's right to know? here are the numbers to call -- you can also find us online -- here is the headline in "the baltimore sun" this morning. brennan targeted over drones. looking at some of the opinions coming in on the editorial pages of the newspapers. "usa today" -- that is of the newspaper's editorial board opinion. jumping down, it says -- the opposing view that "usa today" publishes to give a counterpoint says end the u.s. -- covert drone war. naureen shah at columbia's human-rights institute wr
for president obama's pick for new cia director. >> the administration is taking action to avoid one hurdle. fox 5's melanie alnwick is live with the details. good morning. >> reporter: good morning, allison. and it could still depending on what happens and to what comes out of today's confirmation hearings. calls from democrats and republicans for more about this drone strike program. forced the president to release secret memos to law makers. president obama 's nominee to head the cia is the chief white house counter terrorism advisor under his watch in september 2011. became the first american targeted for death by u.s. drone strikes. his son and another american with al-qaida ties killed weeks later. unclassified memo leaked is causing trouble here. it says it is legal for the government to kill u.s. citizens abroad if they are al-qaida leaders continually engaged in operations even if there's no evidence of a specific attack. 11 senators most democrats demanded the white house provide that legal justification. the aclu is concerned about the program and mr. brennan. >> it's fair to say tha
obama took over and found they were a useful instrument on the war on terror and accelerated them during the last four years whether they're legal is one of the questions that administration has been struggling to answer publicly. they have not engaged as fully with the questions about this as a lot of people would like them to engage. what does the government have power to do. where are the limits? who makes these decisions? very important questions that were important under president bush and under president obama. >> i won't -- in 2009, eric holder at the department of justice said that waterboarding was torture and the president didn't have the right to make that call because he's talking about president bush. yet there's a kill list, "new york times" published a kill list, president obama had a list that he chose who would be targeted with drone strikes for killing. how do they square that circle? if waterboarding is beyond the scope of the president but killing someone is not. >> it raises a moral question, what is more immoral, in the hands of interrogation techniques, torturing a
, of course, is the incoherence and inconsistency of obama's so-called war on terror. remember, this is the administration that didn't even want to call it that. this is the administration that has been mocked because of overseas contingency operations, which screams islam afebruary every time its opponents champion the same sorts of homeland security policies they now are responsible for. >> brian: do you remember that bush 43 and bill clinton 42 were getting along while president bush was still in office. you remember how nixon helped out everyone, from clinton to ford. this would be a great opportunity for president obama at some point, maybe even on tuesday, to say, a lot of the policies i was critical of as a senator, now that i'm in that seat, i can support and my respect goes out to george bush that. would go a long way to getting something done in washington. am i dreaming? >> yeah. this guy has never actually taken the olive branch and used it the way it should be. he wields it like a club and i don't think we'll have that moment. you're right, brian. this would be a t
Search Results 0 to 43 of about 44 (some duplicates have been removed)